Minnesota Sports Forum

khans2k5 wrote:Not everyone gets Lebron or Durant or Kawhi. Towns, Wiggins and to some extent Lavine are our shot at superstars. There's too much emphasis on title or bust. LeBron's team has been to 6 straight title games. The Warriors or Spurs have been to the last 4. That's 3 out of 30 that have been to the finals the last 4 years. You just can't build around title or bust. You build the best team you can and hope you catch a break. If Wiggins/Towns put us at the ATL/IND level you take it and hope you catch a break either attracting a top player to join them or catch an injury break and make it to a finals. How many teams have successfully perpetually rebuilt with the purpose of putting a perfect contender on the floor? None. You build it the best you can and hope you catch a break because less than a handful of teams actually get the opportunity to win a title.

1. Agree in some ways. But we're still far from being on the ATL/IND level.

2. Your thinking (and mine) is actually being ushered out a bit. Even among many analysts/fans. In today's day and age... the sustained credibility from a team like the Stockton/Malone Jazz would be ripped and there would be demands of "breaking it up... they've plateaued." I'm 100% certain of this. This year, I've heard the "break it up" chant about the following teams:
- Toronto
- Atlanta
- Chicago
- Indiana
- Memphis
- LA Clippers
- Portland

That's 7 of the 16 playoff teams that people are claiming are "FAILING" because they won't win a title. They're being ripped for building a good but not great team. Meanwhile, teams like MN, PHI, PHO have been praised for their long view of winning even though none of them are winning much of anything.

I think we're on a slippery slope right now in the NBA with this issue. Like most issues in professional sports... the interest of the fans (most who just want to see hard working professionals play at a high level) are marginalized along the way.

khans2k5 wrote:Not everyone gets Lebron or Durant or Kawhi. Towns, Wiggins and to some extent Lavine are our shot at superstars. There's too much emphasis on title or bust. LeBron's team has been to 6 straight title games. The Warriors or Spurs have been to the last 4. That's 3 out of 30 that have been to the finals the last 4 years. You just can't build around title or bust. You build the best team you can and hope you catch a break. If Wiggins/Towns put us at the ATL/IND level you take it and hope you catch a break either attracting a top player to join them or catch an injury break and make it to a finals. How many teams have successfully perpetually rebuilt with the purpose of putting a perfect contender on the floor? None. You build it the best you can and hope you catch a break because less than a handful of teams actually get the opportunity to win a title.

I just don't agree with the thought that Wiggins is a "superstar". Your true Superstars are transformational in their impact to a teams success. Wiggins has shown to be one thing, and one thing only.....a moderately efficient scorer sandwiched between a couple weeks of premier efficiency. He literally does NOTHING else to help this team win. I get that people want him to magically rise to the heights of superstardom (I do as well), but what on earth points to us that this is his trajectory? He literally needs to drastically improve as a passer, rebounder, defender, etc to become the type we covet. Does this seem rationale given what we have seen to date? Man, I hope I am wrong, but I just don't see it.

But on a second note, I dig your comments about perceived success. I love where you are coming from here, and I have always held the same belief. In fact, there have been many instances on this board where there were arguments to the contrary...that success for our team involves a championship. The flaw, as you point out, is that this opportunity is EXTREMELY limited, even if you have a great team. I always thought that it was a funny sentiment to attach to a team that has been SOOOOOO bad for SOOOOO long. My ideas of success are incremental and sustainable improvements, that eventually lead to a competitive playoff team.

Hicks, I think Khans stated that Wiggins and KAT are "our shot" at being superstars, not that they are superstars today.

After watching Wiggins since his days at Kansas, I am more convinced than ever that his path to greatness is as an elite scorer. The volume is nearly there, the efficiency isn't. But, scorers typically don't hit their peak until between years 4 and 7, so there is still plenty of upside for him to improve his shooting and scoring. The other stuff - play making, rebounding, team defense, hustle plays - seems like a bridge too far to cross in terms of reaching the LeBron/Kawhi/Westbrook type level. Not that he can't improve in these areas, but the ceiling is more limited.

KAT is the guy that could TRULY be a do-it-all superstar, but he absolutely has to improve defensively.